this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
120 points (100.0% liked)

News

23014 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ranked Robin is a better choice than RCV.

STAR voting is a better option also.

RCV has it's problems

[–] nulluser 19 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

RCV has the momentum and is infinitely superior to what we have now. Don't let perfect be the enemy of much better.

Edit: And honestly, I'd be happy if a community chose one of the other options. I don't care. They're all better than what we have and we should be applauding every city, county and state that switches to any of them.

Trying to demonize one because you don't think it's perfect is just muddying the waters and subjecting us to decades of more of the shit sandwich we have now while we debate which alternative is flawless.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

We had the same arguments in the U.K. during the referendum to drop FPTP. Strangely, the people making those arguments on Reddit all disappeared the day after the vote. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I am convinced that was Russia!s proof-of-concept for what would become their information warfare against democracy.

OP, you are most likely genuine and good meaning, but understand that Russia, China, and many other bad actors want you to keep FPTP because it's so much easier for them to manipulate elections. Any argument against change, even if said change is not perfect, is in their favour.

[–] nulluser 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I am convinced that was Russia!s proof-of-concept for what would become their information warfare against democracy.

I find myself increasingly having to consider this possibility when I interact with people online. Are they well meaning, or are they actively trying to sabotage progress. Maybe they're well meaning but have succumbed to the arguments of others actively trying to sabotage progress. 🤷

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

I'm more and more concerned that everyone on the Internet is a bit or a trolly edge lord trying to get a rise.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Voter dissatisfaction with RCV can poison public opinion of ballot reform. Ideally it'd be a stepping stone to better non-FPTP methods - but a lot of right-wing cranks have campaigned to ban ranked ballots, based on complications in how RCV does kinda suck. It's a misuse of a multi-winner system. It fundamentally does not pick the best candidate. It picks the first candidate who can scrounge together 50%. Someone could be literally everyone's second choice and they would be eliminated first.

[–] nulluser 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Someone could be literally everyone’s second choice and they would be eliminated first.

That's such an absurd manufactured edge case as to not be worth considering.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

... it's a concise illustration of the core problem.

RCV only cares about top votes - it can easily eliminate compromise candidates, just because they're less popular as a first choice. Consider the following much-more-plausible election:

40% want A > B > C.
35% want C > B > A.
25% want B > C > A.

FPTP says A wins with a plurality of 40%, because FPTP sucks.

RCV says B is eliminated and C beats A. Even though everyone who wanted A > C would prefer B. And if A beat C, everyone who wanted C > A would also have preferred B.

Ranked Pairs says A vs B is 40-60 for B, A vs C is 75-25 for C, and B vs C is 65-35 for B. The Condorcet winner is B. Why should it be anyone else?